I think he's in ODINSLEEP. They kind of hinted at it early in the film. I forgot who he was talking to, but his knees buckled or he looked weak at one point. right? I might be remembering wrong, have to watch it again.

I think he's in ODINSLEEP. They kind of hinted at it early in the film. I forgot who he was talking to, but his knees buckled or he looked weak at one point. right? I might be remembering wrong, have to watch it again.

It's possible sure but would they want to use the ODINSLEEP again so quickly?
The part where Odin looked weak I think was when he was talking to Thor about luring the dark elves back to Asgard and defeating them once and for all. I thought Odin had lost the plot there but ofcourse his wife had just been murdered by Kurse so I excuse him for that rather reckless decision.
Thor looked quite bemused by Odin's plan.

I like the idea that Loki died, went to Hela and made a deal to save himself by sacrificing Odin in his place.

I haven't seen the movie but Loki as know Odin just as long as Thor. Plus Loki also knows how Thor thinks. They don't call him the master of lies for nothing.

Yes, Loki should be able to fool most. Even Heimdall's gaze can't penetrate his illusions and despite that Odin is their father it seems like both of them has mainly seen the authority figure. I think Frigga was the more loving parent.

I also like how Thor finally isn't fooled by the illusions when he goes to talk to Loki in the dungeons but in the end Loki shows that he's still the trickster god.

I genuinely think... that last shot of Loki revealing himself as 'Odin' was added in re-shoots.. it just seemed too 'real' in the film to me that Loki had actually ended up giving his life in hoping to achieve some sort of vengeance for his 'mother'. The thing for me that sort of solidified that was when Thor visited Loki in his prison after his mothers death, Loki trying to hide his actual demeanour from Thor, he seemed genuinely affected by what had happened and to me seemed to crave vengeance at any cost (even going to the extent of pretending to betray Thor to give Thor a shot at destroying the Aether and taking out Malekith, all while shielding Jane during that encounter).

Something about that final shot just seemed odd and tacked on to me. It is a plot point that does give them something good to work from in future films but I don't think that was the original ending at all. I'll need to see the film again though before I make a final judgement on that so don't take that as my final thoughts on it, that's just from my first screening, going to go see it again on Friday. That's the problem with a 'trickster' like Loki.. you can never be too sure just what exactly is going on...especially how his character behaves in Thor: The Dark World.

Just my thoughts for now... don't take it as final judgement.

Those are my thoughts as well. And in regards to Taylor's comments on the re-shoots, of course he's not going to say they're re-shooting the ending. Sure he could have been telling the truth but the ending pretty much made me, my friends and a lot of the audience go "wut."

__________________Twitter: @Jasper_CH

I still believe in heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by terry78

"I tell ya, that Jennifer Lawrenshinch, I'd like to put my olive in her martini."

Loki has fooled Heimdall, who was said to be more powerful than Odin. He's also a cold, calm and calculating individual who's been observing the Universe for a very long time.

Thor is a hot-headed, relatively inexperienced guy with little knowledge about magic (he's been fooled by Loki's ilusions way too many times) and who had just lived through a period of emotional turmoil. He's also less intelligent than Loki.

Those are my thoughts as well. And in regards to Taylor's comments on the re-shoots, of course he's not going to say they're re-shooting the ending. Sure he could have been telling the truth but the ending pretty much made me, my friends and a lot of the audience go "wut."

The ending was a huge cliffhanger. What else could they have possibly ended with, if not Loki tricking his way onto the throne? I very much doubt that Loki being alive was added in the reshoots. I think it was always planned to be that way.

Those are my thoughts as well. And in regards to Taylor's comments on the re-shoots, of course he's not going to say they're re-shooting the ending. Sure he could have been telling the truth but the ending pretty much made me, my friends and a lot of the audience go "wut."

Why is it obvious that he wouldn't say if they had reshot that scene? It came out that the fight between Superman and Zod in MoS was added late in the process, and that's a much bigger change.

Why is it obvious that he wouldn't say if they had reshot that scene? It came out that the fight between Superman and Zod in MoS was added late in the process, and that's a much bigger change.

A fight between the hero and the villain is not a bigger change than a major character's death. Unless you're referring to Superman snapping Zod's neck, which was confirmed to have been in the original script.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicPinchy

The ending was a huge cliffhanger. What else could they have possibly ended with, if not Loki tricking his way onto the throne? I very much doubt that Loki being alive was added in the reshoots. I think it was always planned to be that way.

They could have ended it like everyone thought it would in the cinema, with Odin talking to Thor and then cut to a wide shot of Asgard or the Nine Realms or whatever. At first I was suspicious that Loki was actually dead, then as the movie went on I actually started to believe he was. It would have been way more effective had he actually died. If Marvel wanted to bring him back then they can do it in Thor 3 with the incredibly-likely Raganorak stoyline.

__________________Twitter: @Jasper_CH

I still believe in heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by terry78

"I tell ya, that Jennifer Lawrenshinch, I'd like to put my olive in her martini."

They could have ended it like everyone thought it would in the cinema, with Odin talking to Thor and then cut to a wide shot of Asgard or the Nine Realms or whatever. At first I was suspicious that Loki was actually dead, then as the movie went on I actually started to believe he was. It would have been way more effective had he actually died. If Marvel wanted to bring him back then they can do it in Thor 3 with the incredibly-likely Raganorak stoyline.

But the cliffhanger actually makes Loki's "resurrection" (for the lack of a better word) more poignant.

If they had simply brought him back, either at the end of this movie or in Thor 3, the relationship between Thor and Loki would have come to a point in which it would have been frozen.

This way, you allow the character of Loki to continue growing, by exploring more of his psyche and motivations beyond what we've seen until now.

A fight between the hero and the villain is not a bigger change than a major character's death. Unless you're referring to Superman snapping Zod's neck, which was confirmed to have been in the original script.

From what I read Snyder and Goyer was on a podcast talking about how the original script had Zod being drawn into the Phantom Zone with the rest. I don't know why Superman would snap Zod's neck if they never fought either so I think the version I read made more sense.

Anyway, I find it extremely unlikely that they ever planned to kill Loki. Apart from what's already been said Tom is signed on for six movies, which also makes it very unlikely that they planned to kill him off. That Loki is very popular is definitely not something Marvel only found out during the shooting of this movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyde

They could have ended it like everyone thought it would in the cinema, with Odin talking to Thor and then cut to a wide shot of Asgard or the Nine Realms or whatever. At first I was suspicious that Loki was actually dead, then as the movie went on I actually started to believe he was. It would have been way more effective had he actually died. If Marvel wanted to bring him back then they can do it in Thor 3 with the incredibly-likely Raganorak stoyline.

To me you made it sound like they handled it perfectly. Made people think that he actually was dead and still managed to turn it around on them within the same movie. I like that better than to do exactly the same thing they did in Thor - Avengers again.

What's confusing about it? Loki has gotten on the throne and they are keeping it a secret how he got there. Seems very simple to me. Figuring out how he got there is of course not simple but how fun is it to surprise the audience with a mystery that is obvious?

Yeah, I like the mystery of it. It meant I left the cinema talking to my girlfriend about, "What just happened? How did Loki pull it off? Where's Odin?" If you can leave your audiences asking questions as they leave the cinema, then they're going to want to learn the answers in future films.

The big question is HOW he pulled it off. Odin is infinitely more powerful than Loki, he's gone toe to toe with Thanos and Galactus before. So, how was Loki able to do ANYTHING to Odin. My theory is that Loki had help from someone, perhaps even a certain purple death-obsessed alien.

The problem I have with the ending is that it really doesn't add much. There are so many plot points throughout the film that begin but never get addressed again. The film ends in the most pointless way because it doesn't leave the audience guessing as to whether Loki actually was killed off. There's nothing surprising about it.

__________________
Celebrating 75 years of Batman saving Gotham City.

Fanboys make excuses, real fans acknowledge screw-ups.

Do me a favour - don't break up my posts into multiple quotes when replying, I won't answer back.

The problem I have with the ending is that it really doesn't add much. There are so many plot points throughout the film that begin but never get addressed again. The film ends in the most pointless way because it doesn't leave the audience guessing as to whether Loki actually was killed off. There's nothing surprising about it.

If there's nothing surprising about it, why would the audience be guessing if he was alive or not? If anything the ending that was leaves people guessing far more because the question of how Loki came to sit on the throne as Odin is far more complex than the "yes/no" question of whether he's alive.

I don't follow how it has a point to leave the audience guessing but to leave the audience guessing on a more complex issue is completely pointless.

For me, the final shot of TDW is underwhelming because it doesn't seem like a big enough change in status quo. Loki's on the throne. So what? He already did that in Thor 1.

The previous change in status quo is that Loki was redeemed; but this ending reverted that. Fine.
With Loki staying true to himself, the only thing that's different and interesting is that he 'may' have killed Odin, and that Thor's trust has shown to be misplaced. But the movie doesn't show you this.

Since Odin's fate is unclear, and since we don't get to see Thor learn that his trust in his brother was misplaced, the Thor/Loki story in this movie ends up not being very satisfying, to me at least. It feels merely like a waste of a developed relationship in this movie and a hint that interesting stuff could possibly come in the next movie.

I would have liked to see Odin's death (And if he isn't dead, then that's just a repeat of the first movie), and I would have liked to see Thor react to this revelation. Perhaps Loki (as Odin) is able to send Thor to prison for his crimes (mirroring the scene of Loki in prison) and perhaps sentencing him to the death penalty. Total Loki ownage. End the movie with Sif sacrificing herself to allow Thor to escape to Earth, reuniting with Jane as a convict (and being in the right place for Avengers 2).

But this sort of would have felt like another climax in the movie, going back to another complaint of mine: I wish the climax of the movie wasn't the generic Malekith plot but rather something with the Loki/Thor relationship that the movie was developing.

Someone said the last shot of the movie is that classic "Loki sitting on Throne" pose?

Also, I like that they did it this way. It is perfect between Loki an Thor. Cause there will always be tension. Given what I've read about Loki in this movie, it really seems like his character arc in this movie was pulled directly from Simonson's run. I mean, this is strait from the comics.

If there's nothing surprising about it, why would the audience be guessing if he was alive or not? If anything the ending that was leaves people guessing far more because the question of how Loki came to sit on the throne as Odin is far more complex than the "yes/no" question of whether he's alive.

I don't follow how it has a point to leave the audience guessing but to leave the audience guessing on a more complex issue is completely pointless.

Because they've done it at the expense of other areas of the movie, like what the hell happened to Heimdall for instance? Frankly, Loki being dead or not is something that really needed to be addressed because there was a sense of closure already. There's nothing complex about him sitting on a throne, in fact it makes the entire scene with Thor grieving over him redundant. Gone is the possibility that he might come back, that answer was given to us already. Ultimately it's like nothing has changed for the series.

__________________
Celebrating 75 years of Batman saving Gotham City.

Fanboys make excuses, real fans acknowledge screw-ups.

Do me a favour - don't break up my posts into multiple quotes when replying, I won't answer back.

Hmm. I wouldn't use that as a direct comparison because "I am your father" happens in the climax, and the movie has an entire denouement, and the moment doesn't undermine the story of the movie.

For me, the ending of TDW is underwhelming because it doesn't seem like a big enough change in status quo (rather it reverts the previous change that the movie developed with Loki's redemption). Loki's on the throne. So what? He already did that in Thor 1.

The only thing that's different and interesting is that he 'may' have killed Odin, and that Thor's trust has shown to be misplaced.

But since Odin's fate is unclear, and since we don't get to see Thor learn that his trust in his brother was misplaced, the Thor/Loki story in this movie ends up not being very satisfying, to me at least.

I would have liked to see Odin's death (And if he isn't dead, then that's just a repeat of the first movie), and I would have liked to see Thor react to this revelation. Perhaps Loki (as Odin) is able to send Thor to prison for his crimes (or sentence him to the death penalty). End the movie with Sif sacrificing herself to allow Thor to escape to Earth, reuniting with Jane.

But this sort of would have felt like another climax in the movie, going back to another complaint of mine: I wish the climax of the movie wasn't the generic Malekith plot but rather something with the Loki/Thor relationship that the movie was developing.

I think it's very similar. ESB doesn't just leave that unresolved, it leaves everything unresolved, so saying that it's different because it's part of the climax is something I don't agree with.

You don't need to change the status quo to have an arc. In this case I think it actually makes for the best arc as it doesn't follow the standard redemption arc, and it's truly in character for Loki because he is a trickster at heart. He might do good things but he will never be trustworthy.

There's also quite the difference between sitting on the throne because Odin happened to need the Odinsleep and Thor was away, and to sit on it because he actually managed to get rid of Odin somehow and he's convinced people that he is Odin. A very different position of power and trust, and given the timing he'll probably have a lot more time to use that power.

I guess we just disagree though, which is fine. For all the criticism against repetition your example seem to do plenty of that as well.

Because they've done it at the expense of other areas of the movie, like what the hell happened to Heimdall for instance? Frankly, Loki being dead or not is something that really needed to be addressed because there was a sense of closure already. There's nothing complex about him sitting on a throne, in fact it makes the entire scene with Thor grieving over him redundant. Gone is the possibility that he might come back, that answer was given to us already. Ultimately it's like nothing has changed for the series.

Why does it matter more what happened to a minor character? It's not like that is a big mystery. At worst put in a dungeon for a while and it changes nothing as he had been taken off duty when he committed treason.

And this isn't just addressing whether Loki lives, it's setting up a special situation for the future. And of course there's something complex about him sitting on the throne. It's all in the how? You can't seriously tell me that you don't think there's some really big obstacles for him to get there? Give me the answer to this then if there's no complexity to it.

Why is it redundant that Thor grieves? Loki hasn't been shown to be alive at that points. Do you realize how much of movies in general that can be named redundant with that logic?

And nothing has changed for the series? A villain sits on the throne of Asgard but all is the same? I'm starting to think you're just having a go.